Friday, December 19, 2008

Let the People Speak!

In March, there will be a New York debate series with Nabeel Qureshi, Sami Zaatari, Abdullah al-Andalusi, Yahya Hayder Seymour, and me. We were trying to come up with some final topics, so Sami and I decided to let the people cast their votes.

What topics would you be most interested in seeing us debate? (If we debate them, we'll post them here, so that everyone can watch.)

I'd really like to see a debate centered around the justice of Allah. How can God be merciful and yet at the same time uphold perfect justice and holiness? Christianity has an answer to this problem in Christ, but how does the Muslim solve this seeming conundrum?

Can Allah truly be infinitely just and allow transgression against his law to go unpunished? I think this would be a very useful debate topic, as it gets to the very heart of God's character and the salvation message.

Yes, I agree with lammaso, a rematch on the same topics would be interesting. It not only gives you a chance to revise or articulate your arguments more forcefully, it allows you guys to be better prepared for the rebuttals since you know already what the other has said by way of response to them.

i would like to see a debate on "is the koran a reliable source for Christian doctrine?" mr. david wood vs. yahya hayder seymour. or would that be too far reaching of a topic? maybe to simplify, "which version of Christianity should we believe, the new testament version, or mohammed's version?"

Thankes professor Wood to allow other people to feell involved in thise things...

My suggestions woulde be:

1) a debate with my friend Sami Zaatari -- tho whom I sende my praiers -- on the accertions that Allah is misericoudious... the Qur'ane says so a lot, but whene reading it we allways find it looks like it is the opposite... misirecordious is inconditional... in the Qur'an that doesn't happen...

2) another debate with Abdullah al-Andalusi (is this same apologist the Doctor Wood debate on the Trinity? I found him very confindent... didn's graspe what the Trinity is, but very confident in is errores...) on if a nowadays muslim should follow the violents rules that are in the Qur'an...

3) a debate with mister Yahya Hayder Seymour... is it worthe? Well... knowing him better and better due to his posts in this blog (and not onlie...) -- bye the way... he's been very silencious... -- and beeing him the concrete impersonation on "taqqiya", I would sugest a debate on can we trust muslim tradition(schoolars that are allways in contradiction one another

I would like to see some of the modern critical theories utilized upon the Qur'an, and let the Muslim then concede due to their own adherence of critical scholarship that this approach to the Qur'an and its conclusion is reliable.

I would like to see some of the modern critical theories utilized upon the Qur'an, and let the Muslim then concede due to their own adherence of critical scholarship that this approach to the Qur'an and its conclusion is reliable.

Did God really gave the Shariah? Are there other options like the secular democracy (which protects the rights of all people, safe guards the freedom of speech/religion for all citizens etc) which are better from the perspective of justice, human rights, freedom etc? Does the Shariah make sense in the light of what Jesus said about kingdom of God, the goal for people of God etc (of course the muslims will say that there is no account of what Jesus proclaimed, but Christians can show the reliability of what can be said historically on what Jesus taught on the subject). If God gave the Shariah (and doctrines of war, mix of religion/politics etc), then, then it should be the best of all available ways in which the nations are governed. Is there any evidence of that?Muslims living in non-muslim majority nations like US/Europe/India etc who enjoy the freedom/rights and even demand these rights - do they accept these democratic rights and the constitutions? Or do they consider the Shariah which does not permit such rights/freedom as superior/better.

1) Is there anything that can be seen as moral advancement in the teaching of Muhammad over the life/teachings of Jesus (as per NT)?2) Did Muhammad violate the greatest moral teachings/commandments of Jesus?3) Given what is said about Ishmael in the Bible (which predates Muhammad), what is the implication to Muhammad who is the (supposed) descendant of Ishmael?4) What is the significance of Abraham's sacrifice (described as a momentous sacrifice by the Quran)?

Is the right and freedom of speech/religion supported in the teachings of Jesus/Muhammad? If not supported by Muhammad, why do muslims whole-heardely make use of that right where it is given to them? If supported by Muhammad, are not muslims living in free societies and demand such rights, duty bound to agitate for such rights in muslim nations?

1) Should today’s Muslims living in secular democracies emulate Muhammad in seeking/obtaining political power for Muslims by forming private "Muslim armies" in their countries if they are strong enough to do so? Since Shariah is supposed to be from God and hence the best, there will be something in the secular democracy that is wrong/oppressive/unjust etc as per Shariah (hence easy to find a justification of oppression for a war against the state). If the secular state is good enough to not take up the opportunity to wage war to replace with Shariah, it is an admission that secular democracy is equal to or superior to what God Himself has given in the Shariah.

2) Should Muslims living in secular democracies join hands with Muslims world over (ummah) and use armed Jihad or war against the nations (of which they are citizens) and take over to establish Shariah should such a call/opportunity arise? Are they allowed to repudiate/reject the opportunity if the worldwide ummah is strong enough and gives the call? On what grounds can they reject the offer/opportunity? on what grounds can they accept?

Matthew said: ANother good topic would be "The Irony of the Qur’an—Surah 4:157-158" ... yep... looool... it seams like it was Muhammad who criated christianity... I havent laugh sow much in thise blog since the posts of mister Yahya... loool...

Is Jesus the Messiah promised to the Jews and the Jewish hope for hundreds of years? If so, for all the centuries of repeatedly reaffirmed prophecies, waiting, God given hope etc to the Jews, did God allow the Messiah to just come and go without a single trace to reliably know anything about the Messiah? And the Messiah came and gone with in fact a false impact (not withstanding the irony that it is supposed to Allah himself who 'made it to look like he was crucified')? Where as, a supposed Ishmaelite descendent who is not even the theme or a hope anywhere in known Jewish history (on the contrary we only see condemnation/rejection of Ishmael and explicit clarification that Ishmael is not part of the true covenant) is supposed to be the 'last, final and the most important' overriding all the God’s Scriptures, prophets, Messiah, Commandments and against everything that can be known from study of history and against all the moral life/teachings/commandments of Jesus (which even the non-Christians readily accept as of great moral virtue even based on basic common sense)?

Hello Mr. WoodI suggest a debate on one or more from these topics:1- Is the Bibles God's Words.2- Was Muhammad a Terrorist.3- Is Trinity not Logic? or is the Trinity Logic?.4- The Prophet Hood Of Muhammad.And Finally I wish that such debates lead to the truth way.Peace Be Upon You All.

" I'd really like to see a debate centered around the justice of Allah. How can God be merciful and yet at the same time uphold perfect justice and holiness? Christianity has an answer to this problem in Christ,"

MBC: There is no justice in Christianity why would God punish an innocent man for the sins of the world, if the Christian God is just he would let his son live ..and forgives sins..

It's soaked in irony that you are so unable to see past your own beliefs, that you fail to notice the Christian position is not that God killed "an innocent man", rather it is that God Himself entered His own creation and led a sinless life with the PURPOSE of an atoning death. Big difference.

And as was mentioned above, just because you don't understand it, or like it, or it contradicts Islam....does not by defacto make it "illogical".

"if thats the case then why dont we accept the Hindu Trinity to be monotheism too .. plz Trinity contradicts Monotheism Jews and Muslims agree on that .."

Exactly as I already said. You are just begging the question. Assuming Tawheed is the only form of correct monotheism from the start is not a convincing argument.

Furthermore, the whole "the Jews agree with x, y and z" argument is absurd. Why don't you try reading the Zohar or the literature of Jewish Kabbalah and see how well THAT fits into Tawheed? Also, try talking to some Messianic Jews (perhaps you should ask Nakdimon about Tawheed). Or better yet, ask ANY Orthodox Rabbi if Allah is the deity he worships. I doubt you will be pleased with the answer.

You have revealed that you are either woefully ignorant of the Hindu sacred writings, or you are purposely misrepresenting them for convenience.

"my point was that Trinity is not mentioned in the Old Testament, therefore Christians have no right to invent things and then attribute them to God"

Well, once again you are begging the question, and just arguing in a circle. Christians don't have a right to "invent things" but GOD has a right to continue His revelation in the New Testament. Furthermore, since you framed the discussion as "Trinity vs. Tawheed" you have to go beyond demonstrating Trinity is false, you also have to PROVE Tawheed to be true. It is very weak to think you can validate Islam SOLELY by a negation of Christianity.

Also, shall we start a list of all the things that ARE mentioned in the Old Testament that refute Islam? I don't think you want to go down that road. It would be an epic list. You don't get to just take what you think agrees with Islam and cling to it, while at the same IGNORING what contradicts Islam, and simultaneously setting the Old Testament against the New Testament whenever it serves your purpose.

The oddest thing is that you are apealing to the Old Testament, while at the same time you DO NOT ACCEPT IT as the inspired word of God.

So once again, your appeals to Jewish theology to validate Islamic theology are a laughable vapid line of argumentation. It seems clear that you have no interest in commenting on my statement regarding all Jewish writings and theological positions that contradict Tawheed (i.e. Zohar/Kabbalah literature, Messianic Jews, and even Orthodox Jews).

I would absolutely LOVE to see a debate on justification/atonement/how man is righted with a just God. I had a BIG discussion on this w/ a Muslim co-worker of mine, and I was completely confused as to the Islam's position on this.

If a false religion like Islam can have some concepts right (like the existence of God, revelation, prophets etc), why assume that other religions have everything wrong? Hinduism is a philosophically sophisticated religion and like almost all other religions, it has the concept of incarnation. They have come with the concept out of sheer philosophical thought/intuition/reasoning. Just as Islam is right in a few concepts, other religions too have got somethings right (like incarnation, need for sacrifices etc).

Women in Islam

American Freedom Law Center

America

The Truth about CAIR

FAQ Page

On this website, we engage Muslims and the foundations of Islam without trying to be "PC". We feel honesty is better than disguised language. As you can read on our FAQ, this is out of love, not out of hatred. Thanks, and we're looking forward to seeing your comments!